Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Stewards/Elections 2025/Votes/TheresNoTime

< Stewards | Elections 2025

TheresNoTime

edit
ContentsYes • No • Neutral
  • Languages: en-N, de-3
  • Personal info: (English)
    Hello, my name is Sammy, and I've been editing Wikimedia projects since around 2008.

    I was previously a steward between 2018 and 2020, and then again briefly between 2022 and 2023. I am currently a global sysop, as well as a checkuser on the English Wikipedia.

    As the result of an English Wikipedia ArbCom case in November 2022, I had both checkuser and oversighter rights removed for cause. In October 2024 I requested the restoration of my CheckUser permissions (via the normal application process) and was successful.

    During my 2023 steward confirmation, I failed to mention this incident nor loss of tools. I should have been transparent and upfront about my mistakes, and I apologise for falling short of the high standard of transparency the community expects of stewards.

    This incident is a blot on what I otherwise hope can be agreed to be a good record of stewardship — as many kindly pointed out in my successful 2019 confirmation, I committed significant time to reducing SRG's backlog and being responsive on IRC. Although the loss of permissions, and resultant inability to help in the ways I had gotten used to/enjoyed, has significantly impacted my local and global activity, I have maintained some activity helping out as a global sysop (SRGR).

    If re-elected, I can again offer the steward team my technical knowledge, previous experience with the tools, familiarity with global policy, experience with combating spam/automated vandals, and a good chunk of my free time. I know I messed up, I am sorry about that, and hope that the community can see fit to give me a second chance to do the work that I enjoy and do well. — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 00:27, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Questions: See Stewards/Elections 2025/Questions#TheresNoTime


  If you have JavaScript enabled, you can easily vote with a Vote! button which will appear in the place of this notice. If you would prefer to add your vote manually, please add:
# {{Se-vote|2025|Your username|checked=|cb=}} <optional comments>. ~~~~
to the bottom of the appropriate Yes, No or Neutral section.

  Yes

edit
  1. Skilsdhuo (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Skilsdhuo (talk) 14:07, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Arcticocean (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  arcticocean ■ 14:07, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Sdrqaz (Eligible, checked by Stïnger)2025 •  I'm nervously supporting, though I'm not very happy with the response to the GS activity question, which reminds me of their low SPI clerk activity before requesting CheckUser. My vote in 2022 was already an extension of AGF, but I'm doing so again mainly based on the reflection and commitments in their request for CheckUser in October. TNT, please be careful, because I'm not sure how willing the Community is to provide third and fourth chances. All the best! Sdrqaz (talk) 14:10, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Stang (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Stang 14:11, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Johannnes89 (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  great work when they held steward permissions in the past. I think TNT has learned from their mistakes and has regained the necessary trust. Johannnes89 (talk) 14:13, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Minilammas (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  --Minilammas (talk) 14:17, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Tulsi (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Please be kind if they wanted to return back to the Stewards' work. I urge to give them an another chance. Best of luck, Sammy! Tulsi 24x7 14:40, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Ajraddatz (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  I think they've learned from their mistakes and would once again be a good steward. – Ajraddatz (talk) 14:40, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Nurtenge (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Good luck! Nurtenge (talk) 15:09, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Leaderboard (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Very able candidate, though I echo Sdrqaz's comment - I can't think of another user with these many chances. I didn't see the answer to Wikibayer's question as particularly problematic. Leaderboard (talk) 15:14, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Barkeep49 (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  The issues TNT had were basically because of their work as an English Wikipedia Checkuser. Since enwiki has already decided to restore checkuser I don't see much sense in saying TNT shouldn't be a steward. For context following the ArbCom case, TNT lashed out at me both on and off wiki. They've since apologized (and I obviously accept) so I am very aware of the past issues and still find myself ready to again support them as steward. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:20, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Taavi (Eligible, checked by Stïnger)2025 •  Taavi (talk!) 15:22, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Iming (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Yours sincerely, Iming 彼女の愛は、甘くて痛い。 15:24, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  14. V0lkanic (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  V0lkanic (talk) 15:25, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Drummingman (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Drummingman (talk) 15:29, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Talimu0518 (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Talimu0518 (talk) 15:29, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Hasley (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Sgd. —Hasley 15:38, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Hey man im josh (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Hey man im josh (talk) 16:16, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Bencemac (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Bencemac (talk) 16:20, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Well very well (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Well very well (talk) 16:25, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Vermont (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Thank you for volunteering to return as a steward, Sammy, and for being open about what happened. I think the steward team would benefit significantly if you return. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 16:31, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Der-Wir-Ing (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Der-Wir-Ing ("DWI") talk 16:36, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  23. ~aanzx (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  --~aanzx · ✉ · © 16:53, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  24. نعيم قربوسي (Eligible, checked by EPIC)2025 •  نعيم قربوسي (talk) 17:20, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Alachuckthebuck (Eligible, checked by EPIC)2025 •  They have learned from their mistakes, and I have seen change. All the best -- Chuck Talk 17:27, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Stjn (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Assuming good faith with hope that enWP drama would not affect things any more. stjn[ru] 18:10, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Ferien (Eligible, checked by Aqurs1)2025 •  I voted against you in 2022 due to a low amount of cross-wiki activity (justification for some of the oppose votes now) but was proved wrong by your brilliant work as a steward in that term. The OS situation was obviously poor but you've taken full accountability for it now and I can certainly trust it won't happen again. --Ferien (talk) 18:39, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Queen of Hearts (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  I support a second chance here. Queen of Hearts (talk) 19:51, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Aopou (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  —Aopou {talk} 19:57, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Martin Urbanec (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  This is an usual request, stewards who lost their role in a similar way generally do not rerun. However, you addressed the 2022 events exceptionally way, and I have no issues with trusting your judgement. Thank you for volunteering and good luck! Martin Urbanec (talk) 20:06, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Achim55 (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Achim55 (talk) 20:14, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Meiræ (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  Meiræ 20:29, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Leserättin (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  Leserättin (talk) 20:56, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Yahya (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  ~ Yahya (talk • contribs) 20:58, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Giraffer (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  I very weakly supported confirmation in 2023, but am happy to lend a stronger support here. It takes a great deal of humility and introspection to unconditionally own mistakes made that publicly, and it speaks to the kind of qualities we want from our stewards. Alongside their previous (very good) track record, I'd be happy to see Sammy return to stewardship. Best of luck. Giraffer (talk) 22:03, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Shushugah (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  They messed up in 2023, combing some necessary actions with unnecessary overreach. I find their explanation very convincing and apologetic. Happy to trust this user Shushugah (talk) 23:09, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  37. XXBlackburnXx (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  XXBlackburnXx (talk) 00:06, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Jet Pilot (Eligible, checked by EPIC)2025 •  Jet Pilot 01:04, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Pólux (Eligible, checked by 20041027 tatsu)2025 •  I appreciate their recognizing of past mistakes and support giving them another chance. Pólux (talk) 02:14, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  40. HouseBlaster (Eligible, checked by Aqurs1)2025 •  Echoing Sdrqaz in their entirety. HouseBlaster (talk) 02:35, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Shizhao (Eligible, checked by Aqurs1)2025 •  Shizhao (talk) 02:48, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Elli (Eligible, checked by Aqurs1)2025 •  Elli (talk) 03:07, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  43. DreamRimmer (Eligible, checked by SHB2000)2025 •  – DreamRimmer (talk) 05:33, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  44. NahidSultan (Eligible, checked by SHB2000)2025 •  Thank you for your consideration. Your experience would be a great addition to the team. ~ Nahid Talk 07:54, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  45. 1AmNobody24 (Eligible, checked by Aqurs1)2025 •  Nobody (talk) 08:02, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Sdkb (Eligible, checked by Aqurs1)2025 •  Sdkb talk 08:30, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Lookruk (Eligible, checked by 20041027 tatsu)2025 •  --Lookruk 💬 (Talk) 09:32, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Jan Myšák (Eligible, checked by 20041027 tatsu)2025 •  Jan Myšák (talk) 09:45, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Mx Lucy (Eligible, checked by 20041027 tatsu)2025 •  Mx Lucy (talk) 09:54, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  No

edit
  1. A09 (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Weak oppose. It's a mixture of your previous actions, and even though I acknowledge your apology and salute you for your honesty, I'd like to see increased crosswiki experience with stew candidates.--A09|(pogovor) 14:02, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  2. SHB2000 (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  I was initially going to support – you knew you messed up, and I think the way you handled that going forward was very well and is the textbook example of what should be done. What confuses me is your response to WikiBayer’s question – if GS work was never your focus from the get-go, why did you apply for GS in the first place? Your stated answer doesn’t address that, and ultimately my reason for voting a weak oppose. //shb (t • c) 14:03, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Stïnger (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Weak oppose as it doesn't inspire confidence for now, given your previous actions that led to losing advanced permissions, and your answer at WikiBayer's question. I think it would be great if you have more crosswiki experience as well, so I may support in the future. --Stïnger （会話） 14:23, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  4. BZPN (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  per above. BZPN (talk) 15:16, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
       Lumihiutale (Not eligible, checked by TenWhile6) •  Lumihiutale (talk) 16:41, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  5. FusionSub (Eligible, checked by Aqurs1)2025 •  I'm sorry, but your activity levels aren't giving me much hope at this moment, with your most recent 50 global contributions going back to early/mid December. -FusionSub (talk) 17:21, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Jusjih (Eligible, checked by Aqurs1)2025 •  Per other opponents' reasons. Jusjih (talk) 17:50, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  7. DCB (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  DCB (talk) 20:09, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  8. MF-Warburg (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  MF-W 20:27, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  9. LR0725 (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  LR0725 ( Talk / Contribs ) 20:56, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  10. PoetVeches (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Strange pen name PoetVeches (talk) 21:54, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Hehua (Eligible, checked by Mtarch11)2025 •  Hehua (talk) 04:37, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  12. JustARandomEditor123 (Eligible, checked by SHB2000)2025 •  JustARandomEditor123 (talk) 07:16, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  13. ProcrastinatingReader (Eligible, checked by SHB2000)2025 •  With sadness, as I think TNT is a great contributor, especially after the revocation of their CUOS rights and the failed steward confirmation. (In particular, their software contributions, and helping out on a less prominent scale since then.)
    I'm not sure if TNT ended up just spread too thin with the many responsibilities, or... In any case, I am concerned about the quick rate of regaining advanced permissions, in combination with the previous incident. I just get the feeling it doesn't end well. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 10:58, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Neutral

edit
  1. EPIC (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  I'm neutral here, though leaning towards yes. They have relevant experience as a global sysop as well as a checkuser on enwiki and a former steward, but as pointed out in one of the questions I see several advanced rights and low usage of them, even on their home wiki (cf. the already public logs and en:Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Audit/Statistics), and this makes me have some activity concerns. On the other hand I also cannot oppose, since as already mentioned they have been a steward in the past and my interactions with them in the stewards' IRC channel have been positive. I also would like to note that I do not care about the past CheckUser issues on enwiki, as it was now over two years ago and TNT has made it clear through their apology that they regret their actions. EPIC (talk) 14:11, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    TNT has been above the median number of checks for English Checkuser in each of the 3 months they've had checkuser again. This true when considering all CUs and just CUs with at least 1 check in that month. I don't think it's fair to call that "low usage" when they've been in the upper half of users. I think that's not a good example of low usage compared to SPI or GS. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:30, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm mainly referring to activity in the roles combined, which wouldn't only include enwiki CU. EPIC (talk) 15:36, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  2. TenWhile6 (Eligible, checked by Stïnger)2025 •  TenWhile6 14:18, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Minorax (Eligible, checked by Stïnger)2025 •  As mentioned by SHB2000, your activity level as a GS isn't that promising and GS don't operate here on Meta so applying for the flag and not actively using it isn't something I'd support. However, being willing to admit one's mistake is a commendable act. Thus, neutral --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 14:34, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  4. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (Eligible, checked by Stïnger)2025 •  People make mistakes, but IMO it is too soon after the 2023 confirmation (only one election skipped), more so when considering how quickly you have already been gaining back advanced permissions recently – and that in at least one case (as mentioned by some) where the need for the tools was rather unclear. Good luck. ~~~~
    User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)     14:41, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Aqurs1 (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  aqurs ❄️ 14:51, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  6. JrandWP (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Neutral, leaning yes. After the 2022 Arbcom case, you need more time in the future to reflect yourself. JrandWP (talk) 15:01, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Adelaideslement8723 (Eligible, checked by Stïnger)2025 •  You have not been very active as of recent, I could have voted no but your contribs are good and not disrupting anything so I am going to keep neutral. 𝒜𝒹𝑒𝓁𝒶𝒾𝒹𝑒 𝒥𝑜𝒽𝓃𝓈𝑜𝓃 (adelaide)🩷T💫C🌺E 15:36, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Wüstenspringmaus (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Wüstenspringmaus talk 15:51, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Ternera (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Per the concerns raised by epic and shb. Ternera (talk) 15:55, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Tvcccp (Eligible, checked by Svartava)2025 •  Tvcccp (talk) 19:33, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Sink Cat (Eligible, checked by SHB2000)2025 •  — Your local Sink Cat (The Sink). 22:58, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Codename Noreste (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Codename Noreste (talk) 23:35, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Miniapolis (Eligible, checked by TenWhile6)2025 •  Miniapolis 23:59, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Cactusisme (Eligible, checked by Aqurs1)2025 •  per above comments Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 03:20, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stewards/Elections_2025/Votes/TheresNoTime&oldid=28227957"